Figure 7.

Optimizing the set of resected channels for Patient 5. (a) (Log)‐Histogram of dynamical outcome performances $〈{\stackrel{\sim }{p}}_{C_{\text{ict}}}^{n_{\text{max}}}〉$ for Patient 5 and the optimal $n_{\text{max}}\in \{n_{\text{ctso}}+i\hspace{0.17em}|\hspace{0.17em}i=0,1,\dots ,4\}$ (cf., panel n _ctso in Fig. 5). All $\left(\begin{array}{c}59\\ 2\end{array}\right)=1711$ possible resection protocols (= channel combinations) of set size 2 have been evaluated. Note the two distinct performance regimes separated by a zero‐frequency regime around $〈{\stackrel{\sim }{p}}_{C_{\text{ict}}}^{n_{\text{max}}}〉=0.3$. (b) Histogram indicating the frequency of occurrence for each of the 59 channels amongst the best performing channel combinations. A combination was labeled “best performing” if its dynamical outcome was smaller than 0.3, corresponding to the left regime in (a). Note the high frequencies for channels 1, 2, and 38. (c) Dynamics of the posterior membership probabilities induced by no resection (top panel), actual resection (middle panel) and the best performing channel resection protocol (bottom panel). [Color figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]